On his bike and pedalling away: Lance Armstrong stripped of all 7 of his Tour de France victories an - Polidicks

[b][highlight]This is NOT LATE, last month's news was the initial findings of the report[/b][/highlight] [img]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/63635000/jpg/_63635665_63635664.jpg[/img] [b][highlight]Updated 13:52[/b][/highlight] [quote=Beebeesee]Lance Armstrong has been stripped of his seven Tour de France titles by cycling's governing body. The International Cycling Union (UCI) has accepted the findings of the United States Anti-Doping Agency's (Usada) investigation into Armstrong. UCI president Pat McQuaid said: "Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling. He deserves to be forgotten." McQuaid added Armstrong had been stripped of all results since 1 August, 1998 and banned for life for doping. On what he called a "landmark day for cycling", the Irishman, who became president of UCI in 2005, said he would not be resigning. "This is a crisis, the biggest crisis cycling has ever faced," he said. "I like to look at this crisis as an opportunity for our sport and everyone involved in it to realise it is in danger and to work together to go forward. "Cycling has a future. This is not the first time cycling has reached a crossroads or that it has had to begin anew. "When I took over [as president] in 2005 I made the fight against doping my priority. I acknowledged cycling had a culture of doping. Cycling has come a long way. I have no intention of resigning as president of the UCI," McQuaid said. "I'm sorry that we couldn't catch every damn one of them red-handed and throw them out of the sport at the time." Armstrong, 41, received a life ban from Usada for what the organisation called "the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen". The American, who overcame cancer to return to professional cycling, won the Tour de France in seven successive years from 1999 to 2005. He has always denied doping but chose not to fight the charges filed against him. Usada released a 1,000-page report earlier this month which included sworn testimony from 26 people, including 15 riders with knowledge of the US Postal Service Team and the doping activities of its members. Usada praised the "courage" shown by the riders in coming forward and breaking the sport's "code of silence". Armstrong, who retired in 2005 but returned in 2009 before retiring for good two years later, has not commented on the details of Usada's report. His lawyer Tim Herman, however, has described it as a "one-sided hatchet job". McQuaid said he was "sickened" by what he read in the Usada report, singling out the testimony of Armstrong's former team-mate David Zabriskie. "The story he told of how he was coerced and to some extent forced into doping is just mind-boggling," he said. "It is very difficult to accept and understand that that went on. "But cycling has changed a lot since then. What was available to the UCI then was much more limited compared to what is available now. If we had then what we have now, this sort of thing would not have gone on." McQuaid was quizzed over the $100,000 (£62,300) donation made by Armstrong to the UCI in 2002, one year after the American cyclist had had a suspicious test for EPO at the 2001 Tour of Switzerland. Asked by BBC sports editor David Bond how he could justify the payment, McQuaid said: "We used the money against doping, it was done openly and put to good use." The management committee of the UCI will meet on Friday to discuss whether to reallocate Armstrong's Tour de France titles and prize money. [/quote] [quote][b]Armstrong report key claims[/b] Achievements of USPS/Discovery Channel pro cycling team accomplished through the most sophisticated, professional and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen Armstrong's career at the team was fuelled from start to finish by doping More than a dozen former team-mates, friends and former team employees confirm a fraudulent course of conduct Armstrong acted with the help of a small army of enablers, including doping doctors, drug smugglers and others within and outside the sport and his team He had ultimate control over not only his own personal drug use but over the doping culture of the team Team staff were good at predicting when testers would turn up and seemed to have inside information Evidence is beyond strong and as strong as any case ever brought by Usada[/quote] [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20008520]Saucy[/url]

Good.

It's okay Lance... I just gave you a medal! That's gotta be worth [I]something[/I]. Right? Infact, I think you'll be getting a bunch of medals!

The Dutch bank Rabobank has also retreated as sponsor for our cycling team, after 17 years. Seems the sport is forever tarnished.

My take on the sport: Fear and loathing in France

News station I heard it on well over a month ago said that the Drug test guys had told Armstrong they'd ruin him for declining a drug test, after they'd been pestering him his whole life with constant tests. You'd think if he actually was doping they'd have caught him over his long career of 7 TdF wins. Edit: Not to say it's impossible that he doped, but I seriously doubt that years later they'd suddenly call him a doper and strip him of his titles.

Whether he doped or not his achievements were pretty impressive regardless. The whole level playing field thing never quite wins me over, some have a genetic edge others use performance enhancers, so what? Does the the whole anti-doping controversy thing get amplified by the "drugs are bad" lobby as some kind of symbiotic process with the illogical war on durgz?

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;38136875]Whether he doped or not his achievements were pretty impressive regardless. The whole level playing field thing never quite wins me over, some have a genetic edge others use performance enhancers, so what? Is it that the whole anti-doping thing amplified by the "drugs are bad" lobby as some kind of symbiotic process with the war on durgz?[/QUOTE] Play some more Bioshock...

not played that in a while, maybe I should thanks for reminding me

[QUOTE=Chickens!;38136865]News station I heard it on well over a month ago said that the Drug test guys had told Armstrong they'd ruin him for declining a drug test, after they'd been pestering him his whole life with constant tests. You'd think if he actually was doping they'd have caught him over his long career of 7 TdF wins.[/QUOTE] Obviously he was just so pro at doping and not an amazing athlete that he managed to trick every test ever!!

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;38136875]Whether he doped or not his achievements were pretty impressive regardless. The whole level playing field thing never quite wins me over, some have a genetic edge others use performance enhancers, so what? Does the the whole anti-doping controversy thing get amplified by the "drugs are bad" lobby as some kind of symbiotic process with the illogical war on durgz?[/QUOTE] This isn't a part of the war on drugs.

Guys, this like 5 months late. Plus, something you should know: He had been giving samples for testing ever since his last win and they've been pestering him the entire time until a couple of months ago when he finally denied a test, which they used as a claim to strip him off his titles. It's idiotic - Lance's a great cyclist and he won everything fair and square.

You have to wonder though, was anyone not doping at that point? I mean isn't it during that period where it was rife in cycling. Like to the point where the British government refused to allocate any sort of sports funding to a road cycling team.

Wasn't there a thread about this like a month ago?

[QUOTE=GameDev;38137019]Wasn't there a thread about this like a month ago?[/QUOTE] This is definitely today's news, it's on [url=http://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/260336043302211584]the BBC's twitter account[/url]. I believe last month's news was the initial findings of the report: it was accepted and actioned by the ICU today.

There was a thread recently with an interview talking about how easy it was to pass the dope tests. It really doesn't surprise me that this has happened, nor that they have made such an example of Lance.

I don't get why people are finding it impossible to believe this. It has never been an impossibility yet people are treating at such because they like the guy.

He still beat all the other doped guys.

[QUOTE=Chrille;38137139]He still beat all the other doped guys.[/QUOTE] I guess the better doper won. :downs:

I'd watch the Tour de France if everyone was allowed to use as many drugs as possible to win now that'd be fun

[QUOTE=latin_geek;38137192]I'd watch the Tour de France if everyone was allowed to use as many drugs as possible to win now that'd be fun[/QUOTE] Like the opposite of say the paraolympics? Where everyone can have as many drugs and augmentations as they like.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;38137149]I guess the better doper won. :downs:[/QUOTE] Essentially what's going on.

Still haven't seen any actual evidence that he used, just him saying he's tired of fighting the constant ZOMG DRUGS accusations which the organisation treated as a confession of guilt. Until proof is given, this doesn't change how I think about him.

[QUOTE=JustExtreme;38136875]Whether he doped or not his achievements were pretty impressive regardless. The whole level playing field thing never quite wins me over, some have a genetic edge others use performance enhancers, so what? Does the the whole anti-doping controversy thing get amplified by the "drugs are bad" lobby as some kind of symbiotic process with the illogical war on durgz?[/QUOTE] And, you know, some exercise and train every fucking day...

While I am unsure of whether he has performed any illegal activities, that isn't what bugs me about this. Instead, it is the fact that they are using the reason that he isn't fighting the drug allegations, having grown tired of fighting it, as an admission of guilt.

Fucking awful from the UCI and McQuaid, they have done everything they could to promote Armstrong (especially his comeback) in the past and now they say "he deserves to be forgotten" !? This is not good. They have nothing but eye witnesses, all of them from former opponents. Apparently all you have to do to kick someone out in sport is forming a big enough union against the winning guy. They have no evidence whatsoever and even if he doped like a motherfucker, they have to play by the rules they set themseves and give evidence. McQuaid saying "it's all fine and dandy now" just takes the cake.

[QUOTE=Ogopogo;38137371]While I am unsure of whether he has performed any illegal activities, that isn't what bugs me about this. Instead, it is the fact that they are using the reason that he isn't fighting the drug allegations, having grown tired of fighting it, as an admission of guilt.[/QUOTE] Seriously, how are they doing this and not showing us any concrete evidence? If he was doping then that's unfortunate, but I'm not about to take the UCI and McQuaid at their word; they've been on a witch hunt against Armstrong for years.

I think everyone should smoke dope and ride some bicycles for the lulz. I don't see what all the fuss is about! :v: Also I find it funny how he says he's not resigning about 3 times.

I don't think it's unreasonable to question whether or not Armstrong doped, but you'd think that there would be significant evidence over his decade-spanning career. It honestly would not surprise me if he did, but the lack of concrete evidence brings an air of ridiculousness around this whole situation.

I still have a lot of respect for him, but I'm pretty convinced that he cheated. Considering EVERYBODY cheated back then, and yet he still managed to beat them. I'm more disgusted and offended by the general attitude towards doping in pro cycling, and how rife it was in the past. The bottom line is, if you didn't dope you didn't win. If you got signed to one of the big teams and refused to dope, say goodbye to your cycling career. These guys pretty much had no choice in the matter. The reason why I like him so much though, is that he put cycling on the map. He gave pro cycling a face, and inspired millions to take up the sport. Which is invaluable. [editline]22nd October 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Edthefirst;38137472]I don't think it's unreasonable to question whether or not Armstrong doped, but you'd think that there would be significant evidence over his decade-spanning career. It honestly would not surprise me if he did, but the lack of concrete evidence brings an air of ridiculousness around this whole situation.[/QUOTE] His team-mate wrote a book about how the lot of them doped and it was "really easy" ... just because he passed all his tests doesn't mean he wasn't doping. I just think they were savvy enough about it that they never got caught, I don't think he could realistically do what he 's done without the aid of drugs or blood doping.